Speaking of North Vancouver, what happened there in 2004 and 2006? Why were those the only times that the Liberals won there?

North Vancouver is centre-right, not hard right so when facing the Liberals is can be competitive, but Tory vs. NDP means Tory hands down. Also Ted White and Cindy Silver made a number of statements during the campaign that ticked off many voters in the riding whereas Don Bell was a popular former mayor and centre-right (a former Progressive Conservative and supporter of the centre-right BC Liberals).

...then there is suburban Montreal (aka: the "450" belt) which went totally NDP last May with the NDP even winning Pierrefonds-Dollard which is quite upper middle class and includes a lot of Jewish "nouveau riche" areas that are quite similar to Thornhill - so go figure!

The off island suburbs of Montreal is overwhelmingly Francophone and with few exceptions generally separtist/nationalist. Whichever party wins the Quebec nationalist vote usually wins here. In the 80s, it was the Mulroney PCs, the Bloc Quebecois from 1993 to the most recent election and then NDP.

I should add in terms of suburbs, although it varies from city to city, they usually aren't exactly NDP friendly. Victoria is generally favourable to the NDP and they did win most of the St. John's suburbs although they went heavily Tory prior to Williams' ABC campaign thus whichever party wins the Newfie Nationalist vote usually wins here as if I am not mistaken those were the areas that are most heavily Irish and Catholic and also voted most heavily against joining Canada in 1949. Quebec City suburbs varies as it went Bloc Quebecois in 1993, 1997, and 2004, Liberals in 2000, Tories in 2006 and 2008 and NDP in 2011 although the Tories did do better in the suburbs in all the past elections than the old city. Stoney Creek went Tory despite the fact the NDP won Hamilton East-Stoney Creek while Liberal in 2006 and 2004 and a three way race in 2008 but narrowly going Tory, otherwise more akin to the 905 belt than Hamilton. Winnipeg South, Saint Boniface, and Charleswood-St. James-Assinboia, the NDP got in the teens or low 20s so if the Tories were to lose here, it would be to the Liberals not NDP. Provincially they only won here as pretty much almost all federal Liberals went NDP and that seems highly unlikely to happen next time around if ever. As for Saskatchewan and Edmonton, they likely will win ridings in Saskatchewan if they get rid of the mixed urban/rural ones and have the Saskatoon and Regina ridings stay entirely within the city limits. As for Edmonton, again 5 of the 8 ridings extend beyond the city limits thus the problem here. The centre-left vote in Edmonton is pretty fluid and tends to swing solidly behind whichever party is most likely to beat the Tories. It went NDP provincially in 1986 and the Tories main opponent in 1988 and 2011 federally was the NDP, whereas provincially in 1993, 1997, and 2004 it went Liberal and that was their main opponent federally from 1993-2004. I doubt they will win many here, but certainly 2 seats is not out of the realm and maybe three if really lucky. In the case of the BC Interior, Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo seems the only possibility, but I suspect if it becomes a Tory vs. NDP race, it will become a bellwether like it is provincially thus usually favouring the pro free enterprise party (Tories) over the social Democrats (NDP) by a narrow margin. BC Southern Interior and Skeena-Bulkley Valley do have Conservative pockets in the West of BC Southern Interior (in around Osoyoos) and east of Skeena-Bulkley Valley (areas east of Terrace) so these could become vulnerable depending on how they are split up or perhaps even more secure.

Sorry for all the cross postings. Been a while that I have been on here.

Vancouver Centre is definitely a huge NDP target. Sure, it has its right wing parts, but you will note how much vote splitting there is in that riding.

I think it depends on how it is drawn up. The problem is the right wing areas are the fastest growing parts. Off course the riding will likely be split into almost two thus the NDP has a good chance of taking the one that doesn't include Yaletown and Coal Harbour, especially if they exclude both. Also even with the vote splitting, many urban voters are quite progressive on the environment and foreign policy thus they will go Green Party or Liberals, but they also want their taxes cut thus why they won't go NDP. In many ways it is sort of like Manhattan which votes heavily Democrat, but I somehow doubt the NDP would do well there considering how wealthy it is unless off course Harper was as extreme as Santorum which he is not.

Of course in the next election if the federal Liberals are led by Bob Rae and the NDp by Thomas Mulcair there will be a weird role reversal where the Liberals will be stigmatized by being led by a man known for being a totally incompetent "tax and spend" premier - who managed to do both very incompetently, while NDP will be led by a man who was widely viewed as having been a competent cabinet minister in a Quebec government led by an ex-Tory leader!!

By 2015, the NDP may start to look like the moderate centre left pragmatic party that any suburbanite can be comfortable with - while the Liberals are stuck with Bob Rae's legacy and prattle on about euthanasia and drugs.

Of course in the next election if the federal Liberals are led by Bob Rae and the NDp by Thomas Mulcair there will be a weird role reversal where the Liberals will be stigmatized by being led by a man known for being a totally incompetent "tax and spend" premier - who managed to do both very incompetently, while NDP will be led by a man who was widely viewed as having been a competent cabinet minister in a Quebec government led by an ex-Tory leader!!

By 2015, the NDP may start to look like the moderate centre left pragmatic party that any suburbanite can be comfortable with - while the Liberals are stuck with Bob Rae's legacy and prattle on about euthanasia and drugs.

If the Liberals are squeezed from both sides, and the two alternative governments are either Tory or Dipper, swinging voters will likely begin to vote accordingly, and be comfortable with either. BC and Manitoba both are effectively two-party with the NDP and a party on the right (although BC may be changing to three parties, and then possibly change again into an NDP vs BC Conservatives two-party system... remains to be seen). Regardless, the NDP has demonstrated that it can perform well and attract swinging voters when it is a credible alternative government.

I should add in terms of suburbs, although it varies from city to city, they usually aren't exactly NDP friendly. Victoria is generally favourable to the NDP and they did win most of the St. John's suburbs although they went heavily Tory prior to Williams' ABC campaign thus whichever party wins the Newfie Nationalist vote usually wins here as if I am not mistaken those were the areas that are most heavily Irish and Catholic and also voted most heavily against joining Canada in 1949. Quebec City suburbs varies as it went Bloc Quebecois in 1993, 1997, and 2004, Liberals in 2000, Tories in 2006 and 2008 and NDP in 2011 although the Tories did do better in the suburbs in all the past elections than the old city. Stoney Creek went Tory despite the fact the NDP won Hamilton East-Stoney Creek while Liberal in 2006 and 2004 and a three way race in 2008 but narrowly going Tory, otherwise more akin to the 905 belt than Hamilton. Winnipeg South, Saint Boniface, and Charleswood-St. James-Assinboia, the NDP got in the teens or low 20s so if the Tories were to lose here, it would be to the Liberals not NDP. Provincially they only won here as pretty much almost all federal Liberals went NDP and that seems highly unlikely to happen next time around if ever. As for Saskatchewan and Edmonton, they likely will win ridings in Saskatchewan if they get rid of the mixed urban/rural ones and have the Saskatoon and Regina ridings stay entirely within the city limits. As for Edmonton, again 5 of the 8 ridings extend beyond the city limits thus the problem here. The centre-left vote in Edmonton is pretty fluid and tends to swing solidly behind whichever party is most likely to beat the Tories. It went NDP provincially in 1986 and the Tories main opponent in 1988 and 2011 federally was the NDP, whereas provincially in 1993, 1997, and 2004 it went Liberal and that was their main opponent federally from 1993-2004. I doubt they will win many here, but certainly 2 seats is not out of the realm and maybe three if really lucky. In the case of the BC Interior, Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo seems the only possibility, but I suspect if it becomes a Tory vs. NDP race, it will become a bellwether like it is provincially thus usually favouring the pro free enterprise party (Tories) over the social Democrats (NDP) by a narrow margin. BC Southern Interior and Skeena-Bulkley Valley do have Conservative pockets in the West of BC Southern Interior (in around Osoyoos) and east of Skeena-Bulkley Valley (areas east of Terrace) so these could become vulnerable depending on how they are split up or perhaps even more secure.

Sorry for all the cross postings. Been a while that I have been on here.

I think the NDP will have a good shot at suburban Winnipeg, because voters there are used to voting NDP provincially. If the Liberals are dead in the water, progressive voters in Winnipeg will have no other choice. Besides, St Boniface? That's Selinger's riding!

As much as a I hate those rurban ridings in Saskatchewan, if the NDP does really well in the province, then it's possible that they will go back to benefiting the NDP more so than fairly drawn districts. If I had the choice though, I wouldn't take a chance on them.

I think the NDP will have a good shot at suburban Winnipeg, because voters there are used to voting NDP provincially. If the Liberals are dead in the water, progressive voters in Winnipeg will have no other choice. Besides, St Boniface? That's Selinger's riding!

As much as a I hate those rurban ridings in Saskatchewan, if the NDP does really well in the province, then it's possible that they will go back to benefiting the NDP more so than fairly drawn districts. If I had the choice though, I wouldn't take a chance on them.

[/quote]Strange thing is, the NDP in Manitoba got 46% of the vote in the last provincial election, and yet just 5 months earlier, the NDP got just 26% of the overall vote in Manitoba in the federal election. And polls for the provincial election published in May were showing the NDP stable in the mid 40's-disparity much? I hope they don't copy the Manitoba NDP policy entirely (I'm not a fan of Doer and Sellinger), but they'll need to at least pull a page out of their books. Elmwood-Transcona is a no-brainer. Winnipeg North will also be a target, along with Winnipeg South, Winnipeg South Centre, and Saint Boniface. Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette is odd. Looking at its socioeconomic demographics, it should be an NDP shoe-in (I take it it's because they're all too socially conservative to vote for anyone who actually represents their interests, just like the American South). Though there's also a large aboriginal population there too. Turnout in the last election was 55% there. Call me crazy, but if they nominate a REALLY good candidate, it just might be feasible.

And Saskatchewan-c'mon, they'll have to win there, even though the boundaries are completely rigged. In all sorts of ridings, even the ugly ones. Palliser will be a must. Other targets should include Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River (definitely the right demographics), and Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar. Some others will require taking votes away from the Torries directly (or drawing in previously apathetic voters to the polling stations for the first time to vote NDP), like Regina Qu'appelle, Blackstrap (a longshot, for sure), Saskatoon-Humboldt, and Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre (boy, how I'd love to see that homophobic grease-brain Tom Lukiwski get the boot). But in these areas of course, drawing in Torries may not be as hard, especially since the federal NDP is ahead in Sask/Manitoba right now. And Wascana might be possible if Ralph Goodale decides to retire, though I do understand it's a wealthier riding.

In terms of Winnipeg Suburbs, I think the NDP winning there will be harder than some here suggest. Winnipeg North and Elmwood-Transcona could easily go NDP and maybe Winnipeg South centre if the Liberals disappear which as I have emphasized earlier that is a really big if. After the 1993 election disaster, the PCs never recovered, but they didn't disappear either and I tend to think the Liberals will follow a similiar path and then eventually merge with the NDP. In the case of Winnipeg South and Saint Boniface, the Tories got over 50% and the Liberals over 30% so you would need pretty much every Liberal vote to swing to the NDP as well as some soft Tory voters. While it is true they did well provincially there, that was only after they had been in power, thus I would think the NDP would have to win first and then prove they were really a centrist party before either would swing in their favour. The demographics in both ridings aren't exactly NDP friendly.

As for Saskatchewan, it is true the NDP can win even with the mixed urban/rural splits, but makes it a lot more difficult and besides I think the strong economy probably is their biggest obstacle. When people are doing well, a party that promises less government and lower taxes will likely be the most appealing whereas when struggling a party that promises to restrain the excesses of capitalism and more social programs is where people will gravitate to. Saskatchewan may have historically gone NDP, but historically it has usually been one of the poorer, not one of the richer provinces as it is today. Off course if commodity prices drop sharply that could change in which case I suspect the newfound strength of parties on the right would evaporate.

Recent polls have shown the NDP is ahead on the Prairies, so it's clear they're ahead in some of those ridings.

Saskatchewan/Manitoba are really small samples much like Atlantic Canada so I would use caution here. I should note Forum had a similiar number one week before last election and we all know what the results were. Likewise I've seen some polls with the Tories as high as 67% in Saskitoba. I usually take the average of the polls for this region. Likewise I really doubt the NDP are over 30% in Alberta as a whole. In Edmonton perhaps, but Calgary and Rural Alberta have always been hostile areas to the NDP and I cannot see that changing anytime soon. The NDP though may be ahead in BC although some of it could be a spillover from provincial politics as I seem to recall seeing a few polls putting the Liberals in front in Ontario in and around the provincial eleciton, but not at the moment. Finally the economy is doing really well in Saskatchewan and Manitoba so not exactly the kind of thing that would cause people to turn sharply against the federal government. People in Central Canada have far more reason to swing against the Tories than in the Prairies.

Well, Wascana should be a target when Goodale retires, since, Liberals are pretty much dead in SK. Liberals will collapse there once he retires.

Not than people there are voting Liberal. They are voting Goodale.

True, although I could see it just as easily going Conservative. A lot will depend on where things are in the political cycle. I am pretty sure if he didn't run, the Tories would have won it, although the NDP probably would have had a strong second. Likewise provincially I think the Saskatchewan Party won his riding pretty handidly, although not sure how it played out in 2007; the NDP may have won it or it would have at least been a lot closer. Off course the most recent Saskatchewan election was in many ways a low point for the NDP, still I don't think the NDP can ignore the fact the province is resource rich like Alberta and doing well economically so if this continues there is a possibility its voting patterns could start to resemble Alberta more over time. Off course Saskatchewan has a strong NDP history which Alberta lacks, so at least the NDP has far more potential there to stage a comeback in contrast with Alberta.

I'm seeing some pretty weird interpretation of provincial election results here. The NDP's problem in Manitoba is that an NDP government is in power there; it's pretty well established that the federal NDP tends to do poorly in provinces with NDP premiers. That'll still be a problem come next election. The NDP's problem in Saskatchewan is the ridiculous riding boundaries. That shouldn't be a problem come next election.

Of course in the next election if the federal Liberals are led by Bob Rae and the NDp by Thomas Mulcair there will be a weird role reversal where the Liberals will be stigmatized by being led by a man known for being a totally incompetent "tax and spend" premier - who managed to do both very incompetently, while NDP will be led by a man who was widely viewed as having been a competent cabinet minister in a Quebec government led by an ex-Tory leader!!

By 2015, the NDP may start to look like the moderate centre left pragmatic party that any suburbanite can be comfortable with - while the Liberals are stuck with Bob Rae's legacy and prattle on about euthanasia and drugs.

If the Liberals are squeezed from both sides, and the two alternative governments are either Tory or Dipper, swinging voters will likely begin to vote accordingly, and be comfortable with either. BC and Manitoba both are effectively two-party with the NDP and a party on the right (although BC may be changing to three parties, and then possibly change again into an NDP vs BC Conservatives two-party system... remains to be seen). Regardless, the NDP has demonstrated that it can perform well and attract swinging voters when it is a credible alternative government.

Yes. Let's not pretend that NDP-Tory swing voters are some mythical beast; they've always existed in the West, where the NDP is strong, and given the new strength of the NDP nationwide one would expect that to spread to the rest of the country.

Furthermore, it's not like the NDP is substantially different from Labour/Labor parties in Australia and the UK, nor are Canadian voters likely to be substantially different from voters in those two countries, and swinging voters there don't have too many problems swinging from Conservative to Labour or Liberal to Labor. The NDP is potentially where British Labour was in the 1920s, and where Australian Labor was even before then.

I'm seeing some pretty weird interpretation of provincial election results here. The NDP's problem in Manitoba is that an NDP government is in power there; it's pretty well established that the federal NDP tends to do poorly in provinces with NDP premiers. That'll still be a problem come next election. The NDP's problem in Saskatchewan is the ridiculous riding boundaries. That shouldn't be a problem come next election.

Of course in the next election if the federal Liberals are led by Bob Rae and the NDp by Thomas Mulcair there will be a weird role reversal where the Liberals will be stigmatized by being led by a man known for being a totally incompetent "tax and spend" premier - who managed to do both very incompetently, while NDP will be led by a man who was widely viewed as having been a competent cabinet minister in a Quebec government led by an ex-Tory leader!!

By 2015, the NDP may start to look like the moderate centre left pragmatic party that any suburbanite can be comfortable with - while the Liberals are stuck with Bob Rae's legacy and prattle on about euthanasia and drugs.

If the Liberals are squeezed from both sides, and the two alternative governments are either Tory or Dipper, swinging voters will likely begin to vote accordingly, and be comfortable with either. BC and Manitoba both are effectively two-party with the NDP and a party on the right (although BC may be changing to three parties, and then possibly change again into an NDP vs BC Conservatives two-party system... remains to be seen). Regardless, the NDP has demonstrated that it can perform well and attract swinging voters when it is a credible alternative government.

Yes. Let's not pretend that NDP-Tory swing voters are some mythical beast; they've always existed in the West, where the NDP is strong, and given the new strength of the NDP nationwide one would expect that to spread to the rest of the country.

The NDP does poorly in Manitoba when their provincial counterparts are unpopular (1988). In 2011, they were briefly unpopular at that point of time as well. If Selinger is popular in 2015, it might be good for the federal NDP.

So would you say Conservatives would get a majority with only 35% of the vote again? What if Rae and Muclair cooperate and let the liberals run in the suburbs and NDP run in the cities?

They'd probably be some vague references to tactical voting from the leaders. Atleast, that's what's happened here in the past.

Vote swapping, anyone?

The Tories won't get a majority with 35% if that is what they actually get on election day. It is true they could get one polling at 35% due to the fact the demographics they are strongest much tend to have a higher turnout so much like this past spring, they end up outperforming the polls. As for vote swapping, it only works if people vote the same way as they did last time around. In many ridings targeted in the last two elections, the Tories got over 50% making it useless or the second place party changed. Looking at the 2008 election results, voting Liberal would have been the most logical choice in Bramalea-Gore-Malton, when in fact it was the NDP who posed the biggest threat. Likewise in 2008, Parry Sound-Muskoka was heavily targeted for vote swapping going on the assumption the Tories would only get 40% like they did in 2006, when in fact they got 50% making it irrelevant. The best way to deal with the problem of strategic voting would be to use IRV system like Australia where you rank your candidates and at least if your first choice does poorly, then it won't cost your second choice the seat.

Problem is that an IRV system won't be put in place for the next election, unless Harper goes batsh**t crazy or suffers a massive brain injury and decides to reform the voting system that has benefited him so much over the years.

Oh and this is weird, but if you do a google search for "NDP" then the first result which comes up is the party's website, whose subtext still says, "Canada's social democratic party led by Jack Layton...." Are the people who run the website asleep at the wheel or something?